Am 25.11.2015 um 23:12 schrieb Simon Albrecht:
I think it would be a nice way to ease writing, unambiguous and LilyPondish :-)
The time length of a duration like 1/12 is clear but I don’t think that it’s notational representation is totally unambiguous, see http://lilypondblog.org/2014/09/how-to-write-readable-tuplets/
I (and other people like Chopin who uses 11/6, not 11/12) prefer what Peter calls the “mathematical rule" but then I found one exception: \tuplet 2/3 instead of \tuplet 2/1½ (how would you write that in LilyPond?) in compound meter (see for example Debussy’s “Clair de lune”). But the length of such a duplet is 3/16, so you couldn’t write it as a simple duration anyway.
So maybe it would be safe to just define these durations like the “mathematical rule” suggests.
_______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
